Almost 90 bombs were dropped in one region in just 24 hours.
Russia unleashed an unprecedented bombardment in southern Ukraine overnight in what local officials described as a “massive attack” in the conflict which has continued to rage even as the international community’s attention has moved to the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.
The Ukrainian Internal Affairs Ministry on Monday morning said Russia dropped at least “87 aerial bombs on populated areas of the Kherson region - the largest number for all time.” At least eight people were also injured in other Russian strikes carried out in the Odessa region further to the west on Sunday night.
Theyre both violating the Geneva Convention…
There’s no valid reason to violate that, that’s the whole point of it.
So… Just let Hamas use their human shields and keep launching rockets? And show terrorist groups around the world that it’s effective? No thanks.
Lots of other countries manage to fight terrorism without violating the Geneva Convention and killing over 10,000 civilians…
Do you think Israel is just that incompetent they can’t?
If so, how does it make sense to give a government so incompetent literal billions of dollars a year?
But regardless of why the fact is the Geneva Convention is being openly violated. Which is a precedent that hurts literally every human on Earth
Are there any that are fighting a region entirely ruled by one? Taliban and Al Qaeda come to mind, and those regions had 100k and 300k civilian deaths respectively, despite US working with local forces.
And neither of those had the explicit intent of using civilians as human shields like Hamas is doing by building military tunnels under hospitals and civilian areas, or 15 years of control to build it around that idea.
That’s a different matter entirely. Other than that US military aid accounts for $3.8bil out of Israel’s already massive $23.4bil, I’d argue Israel is a greater asset to the US than the US is to Israel; it lets the US exert power and influence over the entire middle east.
Here’s a concerning Biden clip from 30 years ago supporting that.: “Were there not an Israel, the United States of America would have to invent an Israel to protect her interests in the region.”
Well, that’s your opinion, and I don’t care much for Bidens opinion either.
Over the decades of his political career, the only times he’s criticized Israels human rights abuses is to tell them it makes it harder for us to give them billions of dollars a year.
He doesn’t care about murdered Palestinian citizens, he just wants to keep the pipeline going so US defense firms get funneled tax payer money.
Do you not know anything about his political history before 2008?
It’s the same reason all American Presidents are “friendly” with Saudia Arabia, also. They have something we want.
Quick question bro but like what’s the ratio of dead Palestinian kids we’re shooting for that’s gonna make em square? Because you can say “we got the bad guy” all ya want, but if you had to bomb a refugee camp 3x to do so, for example, well that brings up some moral qualms for a lot of people.
Of course it does. War is terrible no matter what you do. There were 500k German civilian deaths in WW2 from the Allied Forces’ bombing. Does that mean it shouldn’t have been done?
Yes, wtf, bombing civilians is always wrong.
There’s a massive difference between targeting civilians to kill, and having civilian casualties while bombing specific strategic targets.
Or do you think it’d have been better to not bomb strategic targets, letting Nazi Germany gain the upper hand and kill millions more?
Uh… Yes? Multiple multinational treaties are now in place that disallow indiscriminate carpet bombings
That was 500k civilian deaths with strategic bombing specific infrastructure, not indiscriminate; it would’ve easily been in the millions otherwise.
War has always been costly. Israel is keeping casualties low by comparison, considering Hamas literally governed and built Gaza for 15 years around the idea of using civilians as human shields.
A lot of " strategic bombing " was just to target civilians to cause terror. From the wiki: “Strategic bombing often involved bombing areas inhabited by civilians, and some campaigns were deliberately designed to target civilian populations in order to terrorize them and disrupt their usual activities.”
Look at this armchair warrior, giving his enlightened opinion about how Israel or any nation is justified in bombing civilians, old, young, women.
Try having bombs dropped on your head for a conflict you don’t have a voice on. It’s always the privileged assholes who think like this.
God I’m glad people like you aren’t all in charge. Easy for you westerners to say pretentious bullshit when you don’t have to worry about Islamist terror groups in your country taking it over.
Privileged? You don’t know how privileged you are.
Actually Israel isn’t technically violating the Geneva Convention. When you co-locate civilian and military targets, the civilian infrastructure loses it’s protections under the Convention.
The occupation of the West Bank is in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, article 49. This has been established by the International Court of Justice in a ruling from 2004. Israel’s defense was indeed that the territory is disputed instead of occupied, but its the only country that holds this position. Literally the only country in the world.
Sources: Fourth Geneva Convention, ruling of the International Court of Justice (relevant are paragraphs 90-101)
The West Bank isn’t at war. The Gaza Strip is. That’s the area Israel pulled out of and evicted (some at gunpoint) every Jewish settler; even those who had been there since before the 1948 partition plan. They’ve respected the 1967 borders there with no settlements as a way to prove that pulling back to those borders would lead to peace and not constant terrorism and warfare.
Ok, how does that support your argument that Israel does not violate the Geneva Convention tho?
It doesn’t, he just talked about how the west bank is not relevant to the geneva convention, and his point still stands in Gaza. Civilian and terror infrastructure is intertwined in Gaza, and that’s his argument.
The withdrawal of settlers and forces from Gaza was not initiated until 2005, which is almost 40 years of illegal occupation. In 2007, the occupation was officially lifted and replaced with a blockade. And they did not pull out their forces and settlers to “prove” that “pulling back to those borders would lead to peace”, it was to finally fulfill the duties they agreed on in the Egypt-Israel peace treaty from 1979. The Oslo Accords that resulted from that treaty only exist because Israel did not fulfill their promises after several decades, so there were talks again.
So how about he doesn’t contort the narrative so hard that it makes my head spin?
Israeli left wing parties absolutely did pull out in the belief it would lead to peace. Their political coalition didn’t have the support to do the same thing in the West Bank. They believed that if peace reigned on the strip, and violence continued in the West Bank it would justify a similar settlement eviction in the WB.
The current right wing coalition would have never approved the 2004 disengagement plan. And the violence that followed it is what brought them to power.